citpeks
About
- Username
- citpeks
- Joined
- Visits
- 334
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,007
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 271
Reactions
-
Compared: Apple's 2020 iPad Air versus 2020 11-inch iPad Pro
adyb said:The sweet spot for me would have been an Air with 128GB storage but as they don't do one of those, do I go for the 256GB Air (at £729) or the 128GB 11" Pro (at £769)?
Decisions, decisions!I had the same dilemma, and chose the 11" Pro, because I'd get more value out of its extra features than the extra storage of the Air 4, for the same, or nearly the same cost (~$50 USD difference)Had Apple offered the Air with 128GB, I would have chose that route, but for me, the additional 128GB would have gone unused. Instead, I'll enjoy the better display, better cameras, better speakers, Face ID (Touch ID never worked reliable for me), and 6GB of RAM.The A12Z vs A14 is debatable. The former is an eight-core processor running at 2.5GHz; the latter is six-core, running at 3.0Ghz (GPU-wise -- 8-core vs 4-core). As one might expect, they have different strengths, with the latter excelling in single-core tasks due to its higher clock speed and newer architecture. But the A12Z has better depth, as its multi-core scores are competitive, if not better. The neural engine in the A14 is no doubt more advanced, but its advantages are hard to, or haven't been quantified objectively. One additional small feature that might make a difference if Apple ever makes iPad OS into a more fully-fledged OS is that one has 10Gbs, the other 5Gbs, flavor of USB, whatever the USB IF is calling them these days.By almost every objective measure, the Pro is a better device, as it should be for the extra cost. I would call the processor a wash.When deciding support windows for iOS, history has shown the Apple prioritizes hard architectural boundaries, rather than processor speed to determine which models continue to receive support. First, it was 64-bit, which was the line for iOS 11. Then, iOS 13 dropped support for anything without 2GB RAM.The baseline for current devices is 3GB, which the mainstream models like the iPad 8 and iPhone SE 2 carry. The Air 4's 4GB offers some headroom, while the 6GB in the iPad Pro and new iPhone 12 Pro provides even more.Besides those factors, what firmly tipped the scale for me was that, as of a week ago, I had the choice of either one at the same $749 price, via educational discount. But the latter also included a promotional set of AirPods at no cost. That made it a no brainer.Even now, with the Air being discounted on pre-order, restoring that cost gap, I have no regrets. I keep my devices longer term, and the Pro was a better option. YMMV, based on what you desire.
-
ARM deal nears closure with Nvidia mulling $40B purchase from SoftBank
tmay said:I don't imagine that Apple has concerns one way or the other. Apple is likely at a point where they have in house capability and have licensed necessary IP to create their own proprietary ISA, while also large enough to create the design and validation tools needed to fab at TMSC, or whomever.
I would prefer that ARM reside in Japan or the UK, and not Taiwan, simply for National Security reasons.Most, if not all, of ARM's value lies in its IP, and the ability to collect license fees for that technology. If one's goal was simply the technology itself, that is readily available by becoming a licensee.While there is the risk that Nvidia could try to put the screws to ARM's licensees, including Apple, only a fool would spend $40B to do so, and undermine that investment by threatening the customers, and the business.For its part, Apple has long had a top-level architecture license, and has already been designing its own silicon for years, a fact that seems to have escaped at least one person here.It worst comes to the worst, it can take Apple Silicon to the next level, and go fully proprietary. It would be a PITA, but since it has the dev tools, and owns the whole widget, would not be as arduous a task as it would be for others.The fact that Apple was given a first look, and said "no, thanks" indicates that the company feels confident in its position.
-
Next iPad may look more like an iPad Pro with Magic Keyboard support
Before anyone screams "fake!" and says it's impossible to obtain such schematics, do know that Apple openly publishes these drawings as part of their Accessory Design Guidelines for Apple Devices.It is the bible that case manufacturers use to design their products, with dimensions, sensor locations, warnings, etc.These drawings in particular are too small to determine whether they're authentic, just recycled from the first iPP 11" and passed off as new, or faked, but like the recently revealed "Air" booklet, do generally fit the pattern of Apple's documentation.Once any new devices are revealed, and R13 of the guide is published, the score can be tallied.
-
Apple asks UK landlords to cut Apple Store rents in half
lkrupp said:
You would last about five minutes as a business owner before going bankrupt. There is nothing even close to immoral about Apple trying to get a better deal from its landlords. As a landlord I would jump at the prospect of locking in a deal that would keep a tenant in my building for an extended lease and not have to worry about where my next tenant is going to come from. And you can take your moral judgement and shove it where the sun don’t shine. And I’m betting you are a hypocrite in that you will continue to buy and use Apple products even as you condemn them for their moral turpitude. What a jackass.elijahg said:
Not as fabulously wealthy as Apple. But as evidenced by every last one of your posts, you couldn't care less about morals, your own or Apple’s.lkrupp said:
Such twaddle. Business is business. If you can get concessions from your suppliers (or landlords) that’s what you do. And Apple’s landlords are fabulously wealthy already, no need to worry about them or Apple’s “morals”. Apple is offering to extend leases in return for lower rent. Sounds like a win-win to me.elijahg said:Rent is being cut for companies that are struggling and likely to go under without a cut, clothing stores, grocery stores etc. Apple isn't going to go under: they just reported record revenue while a lot of high street names are making heavy losses (and still paying more than Apple in tax). Even some malls are financially struggling, there's no way they can afford a 50% cut.
Apple's morals really seem to be in the gutter lately. This is a case of the big guy bullying the little guy. Several companies didn't take the government's furlough subsidy and paid employees out of their own pockets, but from what I've read Apple took the government subsidy despite being barely affected by the lockdowns. For a company I've supported for 25 years, this kind of thing is a big kick in the teeth and incredibly disappointing to read.The problem is that most people are seeing this from the standpoint of being residential lessees, where negotiations, re-, or otherwise, aren't common, and leases are more strictly adhered to, in a "off-the-shelf" or ready-made sense, and equal-opportunity rules, non-discrimination, and other tenant protection measures apply.That's not the case in commercial real estate, where the two parties aren't bound by as many rules, and they are purely business deals in a more liberal setting.Apple is far from the only tenant seeking to renegotiate its leases, and while the terms may seem onerous at first glance, they are only the opening proposals as a prelude to further negotiations, where compromises from both sides results in new agreements that satisfy both parties. If Apple's landlords are satisfied by a lower, but more stable cap rate, then there's nothing wrong with what the company is asking for.To name another example, the commercial real estate market in Hong Kong has been severely impacted by continued instability, first political, and now both political and health related. The market has been upended, and has seen both rent concessions offered by landlords, and well as shuttered outlets from retailers sharply curtailing their footprints, including the big, well-known luxury brands who are Apple's peers. That includes some of the most valuable real estate in the world, and the only outcry stems from the lamentable situation, not the actions being taken in reaction to it. That's part of the business and the landlords understand that.Apple is not a person, and neither are the big landlords. Both are businesses, with the fiduciary duty to maximize their earnings to the benefit of shareholders and owners, and these are business arrangements, subject to market conditions.That the company just posted record quarterly revenues is not a factor that enters into such negotiations, any more than the income of an individual lessee factors into a rental price. Or would people really rather have their landlords charge different rents to different tenants keyed to their income? Aside from being illegal, it's probably not something many would desire, so should the same principle be applied to this situation?In short, it's business.
-
Allegations of discrimination spawn investigation into Apple Card credit lines
larryjw said:The issue I raised to myself as I was requesting the Apple Card:
First, don't know the information credit agencies get. I'm pretty sure they don't get any tax information, or have any idea of our net worth. I'm not sure they have access to investment accounts.
In any case, except for a few special accounts, my wife and I have joint accounts.
So, when credit worthiness is determined, they are determining that decision based on our joint financial interests. I got the Apple Card.
Now, if my wife requests the Apple Card, they cannot determine her credit worthiness independent from the determination of our credit worthiness when I signed up, otherwise they would be, in some sense, doubling the estimate of our credit worthiness.
Because the Apple Card account is not issued to spouses jointly, it makes sense that the first to get the Apple Card, gets the max, while the second spouse might get denied or a minimal limit.
The solution for Apple-GS is to tie both cards together into one account by default.There is a lot of misinformation in this thread.First off, in general, lenders look at a variety of factors in determining a borrower's creditworthiness. Income is one, as are assets.A person's credit score is another. it is an individual score, covering every reported creditor you've ever had in your financial life. Another person only factors in when you both appear on a joint credit account (like when you co-sign for someone), but that is simply another entry in the list. A person's score is still predominantly their own.Contrary to popular belief, your credit score has nothing at all to do with income or assets. It is strictly a measure of your ability to responsibly borrow money. The only accounts it looks at are credit accounts. Whether you pay your bills, and pay them on time is one of the biggest factors in the scoring algorithm. It also factors in credit utilization % -- how much of your credit lines are you using?A person who makes little income, but pays off their bills, on time, is going to have a higher score than one who makes high incomes, but uses most of their credit line, or doesn't pay their bills on time. The credit score does not judge whether your income gives you the ability to pay your bills; it only evaluates how you act when paying them (or not).Credit scores fluctuate naturally as a person goes about the business of living and borrowing money, whether acquiring new lines or credit, closing old ones, and simply making use of existing lines.While a mortgage lender does take into account all of the factors, and more, such as a stable employment history, a credit card lender does not go that far. A person's credit score, and stated income and occupation is about as far as it goes most of the time.If a lender wishes to independently verify your income with the IRS, they must do so with your permission. They may also ask to you to provide confirmation, in the form of pay stubs, but again, that is only with your permission. But most of the time, they do not, and while they are required by law to ask, the information you provide is voluntary (but legally obligated to be truthful).I'd have to dig out an old tri-merge to confirm, but I don't think gender is even part of a credit report, and even if it was, it was never considered as part of the work we did. DHH's wife may not have received as high of a line as he believes she should, but that is probably a result her history run through the models used, not overt discrimination based on gender.Just because the dude is a successful businessman who can afford to spend six figures annually as a privateer P2 driver in the WEC doesn't mean his wife will automatically be afforded the same credit line, at least as far as the banks are concerned.
